[landic]

Hello and thanks for you suggestions.
I'm looking for a 6139 600x in good working conditions, and I found this one from north America, told to be all original and serviced... a video shows it working quite well. I've studied several criteria to distinguish the good from the bad, but I'm still not able to understand if (or which part of it) is original.
Thanks for your opinions and to the community.

 

[Katgirl]

Looks pretty good, though the case back has been way over polished. I can’t see Japan J under the serial number. Is there a better pic of the case back? Here is a pic of one of my case backs:

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[byscott]

There are many threads on this forum about how to recognize aftermarket Pogue parts. Use the search feature and you can find them. I recommend that you do some research to better educate yourself.

As for this watch, I would suggest that you avoid it and continue the search. From the caseback, it looks like the case has been heavily polished (not good). The sweep and sub dial hands look like they are aftermarket. The pushers may be aftermarket as well. Correct pushers have a beveled edge, while the aftermarket pushers have rounded ends.

Finally, the outer bezel has a rectangular block under the “60” mark, which was introduced in mid-1976. The serial number on the caseback of this watch dates to 1971. Most likely the caseback is not original to this watch. Given this mismatch, and the aftermarket parts, this watch is clearly not “all original.”

 

[Katgirl]

There are many threads on this forum about how to recognize aftermarket Pogue parts. Use the search feature and you can find them. I recommend that you do some research to better educate yourself.

As for this watch, I would suggest that you avoid it and continue the search. From the caseback, it looks like the case has been heavily polished (not good). The sweep and sub dial hands look like they are aftermarket. The pushers may be aftermarket as well. Correct pushers have a beveled edge, while the aftermarket pushers have rounded ends.

Finally, the outer bezel has a rectangular block under the “60” mark, which was introduced in mid-1976. The serial number on the caseback of this watch dates to 1971. Most likely the caseback is not original to this watch. Given this mismatch, and the aftermarket parts, this watch is clearly not “all original.”

Agree about the pushers, and the subtle differences of original bezels, depending on the model year, is something I have just been learning about. I don’t know how these guys can tell the hands are aftermarket so easily, but I believe them. I do know the condition of the case back, alone, would keep me away, though.
Keep hunting…..

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[zeke441]

Agreed, not the one for you. The case, caseback, and bracelet have all been polisshed and badly rebrushed. The watch itself is a mixmatch of different years and the sub and sweep hands look funky. Far from being all original.

 

[byscott]

A note on aftermarket hands …

Most of the aftermarket Pogue hands look different from the originals due to (I think) differing manufacturing and finishing processes. Here is a picture of a silver Pogue that was the subject of a recent thread. The sweep and sub dial hands are correct Seiko parts:

Note the areas where the hands meet the pinions. On the sweep hand, it is perfectly flat. The sub dial hand is pressed onto a brass tube; the brass is clearly visible as a small eyelet in the center of the hand.

Here is a picture of a typical set of aftermarket hands:

Note that the areas where the hands meet the pinions look significantly different. The center section of each hand is raised and the center section of the sub dial hand shows no brass. I think the sub dial hands are manufactured first and then finished — the OE hands appear to be assembled from two previously-finished pieces.

 

[CombatID]

I also believe that the caseback itself is AM. There is a lot wrong with it IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grammarofdesign]

Let’s keep it going. The tapered bracelet would not be correct for a Jan 1971.

Do I read 6139-6001 on the case back?

I think it’s a parts mash up, not all original parts has some AM as per above.

 

[Grammarofdesign]

I also believe that the caseback itself is AM. There is a lot wrong with it IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My thoughts at first, could well be, or just abused.
January 1971 for a -6001 ? Calling Ewan

 

[Rats2017]

I'm no expert but a guy I know who is alerted me to the numbers on the caseback. Anything slightly off in spacing or on an angle with the first 2 numbers is suss?

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[boostchrono]

Is it just me or Chrono24 is mostly overpriced junk anyway when it comes to vintage Seiko.

 

[landic]

There are many threads on this forum about how to recognize aftermarket Pogue parts. Use the search feature and you can find them. I recommend that you do some research to better educate yourself.

As for this watch, I would suggest that you avoid it and continue the search. From the caseback, it looks like the case has been heavily polished (not good). The sweep and sub dial hands look like they are aftermarket. The pushers may be aftermarket as well. Correct pushers have a beveled edge, while the aftermarket pushers have rounded ends.

Finally, the outer bezel has a rectangular block under the “60” mark, which was introduced in mid-1976. The serial number on the caseback of this watch dates to 1971. Most likely the caseback is not original to this watch. Given this mismatch, and the aftermarket parts, this watch is clearly not “all original.”

Thank you and everybody for answering. I’ll keep studing and hunting. I’ve also seen one recently offered on this site.

 

[Katgirl]

A note on aftermarket hands …

Most of the aftermarket Pogue hands look different from the originals due to (I think) differing manufacturing and finishing processes. Here is a picture of a silver Pogue that was the subject of a recent thread. The sweep and sub dial hands are correct Seiko parts:

View attachment 488743

Note the areas where the hands meet the pinions. On the sweep hand, it is perfectly flat. The sub dial hand is pressed onto a brass tube; the brass is clearly visible as a small eyelet in the center of the hand.

Here is a picture of a typical set of aftermarket hands:

View attachment 488744

Note that the areas where the hands meet the pinions look significantly different. The center section of each hand is raised and the center section of the sub dial hand shows no brass. I think the sub dial hands are manufactured first and then finished — the OE hands appear to be assembled from two previously-finished pieces.

Thanks for that. Very helpful info, in case I decide I need a fifth one….


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Katgirl]

I also believe that the caseback itself is AM. There is a lot wrong with it IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought the same thing about the case back. It just looks off.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[CombatID]

I thought the same thing about the case back. It just looks off.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, here is yours

And the suspect one

Look at the number font, especially the “2”. I think this was intensionally over polished so that a new serial number could be struck. The caseback recessed slots look AM but it might be that it was polished so heavily that the metal flowed into the slots. Your caseback has super sharp slots, the other one is best described as “mushy”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[byscott]

Now that you mention it, Tod, there was a run of fake -6001 engraved casebacks with January 1971 serials. Here are a couple that I had grabbed pictures of:

 

[byscott]

Is it just me or Chrono24 is mostly overpriced junk anyway when it comes to vintage Seiko.

Nope, it's not just you

 

[nafokies]

I didn't even realize fake casebacks were a thing. What's next, fake midcases? Feels like we're getting close to entirely fake repros.

 

[Katgirl]

I didn't even realize fake casebacks were a thing. What's next, fake midcases? Feels like we're getting close to entirely fake repros.

Seiko should do a reproduction, themselves. I wonder why they haven’t, given that they’ve done other popular early watches. Maybe it would be too expensive to reproduce the day/date mechanism. I guess they wouldn’t try that, though, but would completely modernize the movement.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jringo8769]

well the 6139 market for fakes is at a all time high
with people going nuts for junk we all would not even fix just a few years ago
i love to save everything but some of this junk on the market now is really ruining it for everyone
and with all the fake parts being made it is making it even harder now with a see of garbage out there
i am sure with CDC technology and the greed of others
there will be someone who will make parts that will fool most of us
God Bless,John